1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

ESPN: DeMaurice Smith talks at Maryland

Discussion in 'NFL Zone' started by SaltwaterServr, May 19, 2011.

  1. SaltwaterServr

    SaltwaterServr Blank Paper Offends Me

    8,124 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6566569

    You can read the article at the link above, because I want to quote this one little sentence from it that gives a good idea of what a lot of people have been saying all along, this was headed to court from the players side from the word go.

    ----------------------------------------------
    From the article:

    "The decision to pursue and if necessary fight for what is fair was a decision those players made two years ago. And I've got to tell you, it's vastly different from something as simple as 'shut up and play.' That's not the decision that we made. We made the decision to fight for who we were going to be and who we are."
    ----------------------------------------------

    Two years ago the players decided to "fight". Not negotiate, not get an amicable deal done, but "fight".

    Those wanting to believe the owners started this with the option out of the CBA might want to consider Smith's stance. The guy never had any intention of negotiating in good faith, and this was going to court no matter what the NFL offered.
  2. MarionBarberThe4th

    MarionBarberThe4th Well-Known Member

    11,842 Messages
    69 Likes Received
    If the owners got that illegal TV money the players would have been stomped.
  3. theogt

    theogt Surrealist Zone Supporter

    43,720 Messages
    434 Likes Received
    You're exactly right that Smith does not say that their goal is to "fight" to get an "amicable" deal done. In fact, his words were to "fight" to get a "fair" deal done. THE HORROR!
  4. Plumfool

    Plumfool Active Member

    723 Messages
    30 Likes Received
    That's what I read as well. To fight for a fair deal.
  5. SaltwaterServr

    SaltwaterServr Blank Paper Offends Me

    8,124 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Don't see him mentioning a "deal" at all, anywhere in there. Half truth?
  6. JIGGYFLY

    JIGGYFLY Active Member

    1,360 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Is that all you could come up with from the full article, that he used the word fight :laugh2:

    Talk about reaching to make a point.
  7. SaltwaterServr

    SaltwaterServr Blank Paper Offends Me

    8,124 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Way to miss half of the point completely despite me underlining, bolding, and italicizing it for you.

    Two years ago, they had planned the path to litigation but you, being solidly in the player's corner, would never see it that way despite the current events.

    DeMoron has made statements over and over along the same combative lines. He's mentioned specifically of "going to war" in this labor situation.

    Your side never intended anything other than presenting a facade of negotiating before heading to court.
  8. MarionBarberThe4th

    MarionBarberThe4th Well-Known Member

    11,842 Messages
    69 Likes Received
    Again, what was there to negotiate when the owners had that war chest that Smth fought in court?

    Without that win in the courts the players were at the mercy of the owners.

    I dont blame D. Smith for blocking a right hook
  9. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    15,710 Messages
    804 Likes Received
    Funny how the term fair is handled when my family regularly has to decide upon a meatless Friday, and we are NOT Catholic.

    If the Post Office offered me but $20,000, my retirement papers would be in tomorrow...without negotiation.:)
  10. SaltwaterServr

    SaltwaterServr Blank Paper Offends Me

    8,124 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    What was there to negotiate??? Without that win they were at the mercy of the owners???? Have you not been following what's been taking place in the courts, at all, since the NFLPA* decertified???

    The league/owners can live without the money, they have other incomes and businesses. The players do not. They still won't see that money, no matter what Doty awards, until the appeal process for that plays out. You blame the home owner for having insurance against fire when the house burns down by accident, but ignore the fact that the NFLPA* was setting the fire in the first place. Stretch of an analogy, but the NFLPA's actions are what brought about the insurance against there not being football played in 2011.

    The war chest keeps getting brought up over and again, but those monies are irrelevant if a deal was actually struck without the NFLPA* taking to the courts, which many here have discussed was their expected intent all along.

    That money still might end up being irrelevant, or an irrelevant amount, once it gets appealed after Doty's award.
  11. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    15,710 Messages
    804 Likes Received
    Lol, Salty...the old addage, don't count your chickens before the eggs are hatched.
  12. peplaw06

    peplaw06 That Guy

    13,680 Messages
    407 Likes Received
    You do understand that the owners opted out of the CBA in 2008 right?

    And you focus on the word "fight," but glaze over the verbiage in the portion that you bolded, italicized, and underlined, which says that the players made the decision... It's not just "Smith's stance," nor is it just "the guy['s]" decision.
  13. stasheroo

    stasheroo Well-Known Member

    17,242 Messages
    1,095 Likes Received
    There are no 'angels' in all of this, each side played a role in getting us to where we are.

    Both sides had the option to opt out of the CBA, the owners felt they were getting the lesser of it so they did opt out. The players loved where it was and don't want to slide back to a different split.

    The owners tried a shady deal to have income with no football and freeze out starving players and got caught.

    They tried last-minute negotiations but Smith and the players decided to take their chances having the courts fight their battles. They thought they had won, turns out they lost.

    The courts are telling them to fight their own battles and they need to realize that.

    At this point, the 'really rich guys' will simply outlast the 'rich guys'.
  14. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    15,710 Messages
    804 Likes Received
    (coughing strongly) No money required might catch your eyes, right? How about the election of a new President, health issues, as well a full fledged monetary and industrial insolvency rampant throughout an entire Nation?

    I can't for the life of me figure out why the owners would have chosen to opt out of a contract that already foresaw future problems arriving and included that very remedy for such occasions. :rolleyes:

    Please fill all our heads with why the top 5% income makers would cry foul to the top 1% group when they do NOT provide any of the investment capital or are responsible for payment of any and all support related bills as well....when an entire Nation, including it's physcal leaders are asking for help in tightening their respective belts.

    C'mon now, with a little candor displayed for ONCE, just tell us what your direction projected would have been with the inclusion of the late Eugene Upshaw rather than a former Trial Attorney....:cool:

    Just give us some of that bandstanding, I didn't understand a word you stated garble...followied by an imitation of a peafowl in splendor.:D

    Holy Mack'ril, we ain't even started the chick'n pluckin' yet....and don't forget that those wee lit'l chicks need a warm temperature of 102 degrees F. before they start putting feathers on. But if you can listen to those 'chicks' at that point, they are saying: Cheap! Cheap! Cheap!:lmao:And I think we need a 'brooder.'
  15. SaltwaterServr

    SaltwaterServr Blank Paper Offends Me

    8,124 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Yet it's the head of the NFLPA* grandstanding by using hostile language that makes no mention of commiting to getting a deal done, but rather "fighting" and "going to war." It's more indirect evidence that the second the owners exercised the option in the CBA to opt out, that the NFLPA* had thoughts of litigation rather than negotiation. Taken as a whole, Smith's statements are potentially giving the NFL's case before the NLRB more inflammatory statements that contradict that he and the NFLPA* ever intended to negotiate in good faith.

    You can examine every drop of rain and determine it wasn't responsible for the flood, but the waters rise nonetheless.

    Then again, we don't know if he's being honest about that at all, since DeMoron doesn't seem to adhere to the truth of the matter as of the last few days...

    http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3954562&postcount=572
  16. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    15,710 Messages
    804 Likes Received
    Thank you for showing tact.

    tact - the ability to tell a person to eat **** and like it
  17. peplaw06

    peplaw06 That Guy

    13,680 Messages
    407 Likes Received
    :laugh2:

    Wow, this is way off base. What's actually happening here is you [and others like you] are watching the waters rise and blaming this drop of rain or that drop of rain, but not blaming the rest of the drops.
  18. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    15,710 Messages
    804 Likes Received
    Leave it to a lawyer to blame God for one of his greatest gifts to man - water. Talk about losing the forrest for a tree.

    I wonder was that tree involved before or after breaking apart from that forrest?
  19. burmafrd

    burmafrd Well-Known Member

    41,437 Messages
    1,457 Likes Received
    I do love the increasing desperation that the ones defending the lawyer are willing to go to. THere was only one reason to make a lawyer the head of the union instead of a former player. That was because they agreed with him to go to court if the owners did not roll over and give them everything they wanted. He sold them on this and it is looking like he was wrong. But the lawyers always close ranks, most of the time, to defend another lawyer.
  20. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    15,710 Messages
    804 Likes Received

    The likely changes would be great for NFLPA lawyers, but not for players, teams, or, most importantly, fans," Mara wrote. "For example, there could be no league-wide minimum player salaries, with many players making less than they do today, or no minimum team player costs, with many clubs cutting payrolls the way some teams do in other sports. Other bedrock components of the NFL's competitiveness, such as the draft, would be called into question and assailed as antitrust violations. ...

    Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/05/19/3087470/nflpa-head-lockout-isnt-about.html#ixzz1MtQCGago


    I wonder if the 'we are the world,' lawyer group, would describe Mara's comments as just raw sewage overflow from that 'great flood.'

Share This Page